Thank you for the excellent questions, Bill.
Right now IMHO the best bet is probably just to pick whichever format
you are most comfortable with (yup it depends) and use that as the
single source, transforming perhaps with scripts to generate the
alternate representations for conneg.
As far as
2009/6/24 Ivan Herman i...@w3.org:
With the
increasing popularity of RDFa our system guys have already complained
about sudden server request surges on that service. Ie, although it is
fine to use the service as it is in the .htaccess example (with full
URI-s, though) if you (or anybody
Hi,
2009/6/23 Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com:
All,
As you may have noticed, AWS still haven't made the LOD cloud data sets --
that I submitted eons ago -- public. Basically, the hold-up comes down to
discomfort with the lack of license clarity re. some of the data sets.
Yes, this
On 24 Jun 2009, at 00:04, Peter Ansell wrote:
2009/6/24 Ian Davis li...@iandavis.com
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:11 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com
wrote:
Using licensing to ensure the data providers URIs are always
preserved delivers low cost and implicit attribution. This is
While we could have countless arguments over the appropriateness of DL
(or OWL 2) in the Web environment, the bottom line is whether or not
owl:imports adds useful information - seems hard to see a problem with
that, whether agents can reason or not. The follow your nose thing.
What's the problem
2009/6/24 Ivan Herman i...@w3.org:
Unfortunately, no:-(
concise, but to the point, thanks :)
--
http://danny.ayers.name
On Jun 23, 2009, at 7:04 PM, Peter Ansell wrote:
Interestingly, there is a large economy involved with patenting gene
sequences. Aren't they facts also? Why is patenting different to
copyright in this respect?
It isn't. I don't know of any gene sequence patent that was just that
and
Ivan
Thanks very much. I'll take a look at your python scripts, which should be
very useful.
Cheers
Bill
Van: Ivan Herman [mailto:i...@w3.org]
Verzonden: wo 24-6-2009 9:14
Aan: Bill Roberts
CC: public-lod@w3.org
Onderwerp: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and
Ivan, two words : more python!
2009/6/24 bill.robe...@planet.nl:
Ivan
Thanks very much. I'll take a look at your python scripts, which should be
very useful.
Cheers
Bill
Van: Ivan Herman [mailto:i...@w3.org]
Verzonden: wo 24-6-2009 9:14
Aan: Bill
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.comwrote:
My comments are still fundamentally about my preference for CC-BY-SA.
Hence the transcopyright reference :-)
I want Linked Data to have its GPL equivalent; a license scheme that:
Have you read the licenses at
2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com:
My comments are still fundamentally about my preference for CC-BY-SA. Hence
the transcopyright reference :-)
Unfortunately your preference doesn't actually it make it legally
applicable to data and databases. The problem, as I see it, at the
Leigh Dodds wrote:
2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com:
My comments are still fundamentally about my preference for CC-BY-SA. Hence
the transcopyright reference :-)
Unfortunately your preference doesn't actually it make it legally
applicable to data and databases.
The
Leigh Dodds wrote:
Hi,
2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com:
Kingsley Idehen wrote:
Leigh Dodds wrote:
Hi,
2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com:
To save time etc..
What is the URI of a license that effectively enables data publishers to
Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
Kingsley,
Encouraging attribution by URI is a bad idea because it encourages
people or organizations to create URIs where perfectly good ones
exist, solely so that they can get their attribution. Were this no
cost, I wouldn't mind. But having more than one URI for a
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.comwrote:
The NYT, London Times, and others of this ilk, are more likely to
contribute their quality data to the LOD cloud if they know there is a
vehicle (e.g., a license scheme) that ensures their HTTP URIs are protected
Ian Davis wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Kingsley Idehen
kide...@openlinksw.com mailto:kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
I stand by my position, we are adhering to their terms.
What they seek is de-referencable via their URIs which remain in
scope at both the data
2009/6/25 Ian Davis li...@iandavis.com:
I think the onus is on the consumer to ensure they abide with the supplier's
wishes, not the other way round. It's really a matter or respect and
politeness to give people the credit they ask for.
Certainly in principle, but the supplier should know
17 matches
Mail list logo
